Conservatives have been expressing genuine anguish at the recent treatment of Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain.

It isn’t fair, they say. In 1998, when Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff got the full details of President Bill Clinton’s adulterous affair with a 21-year-old intern, the magazine killed the story, leaving the nascent new media, in the person of The Drudge Report, to bring it to light. In 2007, when John Edwards was still a viable Democratic presidential candidate, the National Enquirerbroke the news of his illicit affair and illegitimate child, but the mainstream media actually covered it up, with one CNN journalist explaining it was “unimportant.”

And yet when the left wing news website Politicorecently published anonymous allegations about 10-year-old sexual harassment complaints against Cain, the mainstream media lit up like a Christmas tree. For a week, the aforementioned CNN and the other left wing outlets went wall-to-wall with the charges. And now, with Sharon Bialek finally stepping forward to make more detailed accusations in person—accusations Cain wholly denies—we can be sure the story will remain explosive for some time to come.

Not only is the news coverage of alleged sexual misconduct different according to political affiliation, the consequences of actual misconduct are often quite different as well. Republican congressman Mark Foley sent suggestive emails to male pages; he resigned under GOP pressure. Democratic congressman Gerry Studds actually had sex with one of the boys, then flung defiance at the House when they censured him; he was re-elected by Democrats until his retirement.

And what if a drunken Republican senator had accidentally dropped a car containing his adultery mate into the water? What if he had sauntered back to his hotel to clean up while the poor woman desperately pounded on the car window until she drowned horribly? Would conservatives have re-elected that man? Would they have declared that man “The Lion of the Senate?” The very idea makes one ill. Conservatives would have demanded his arrest and trial with a single voice.

270 Comments, 123 Threads

I guess we might not ever catch the devil hanging on a cross, but that shouldn’t stop us from trying our best to put him, or any of his followers, up there. Item: the essence of justice is mutuality. Thus, by definition, and process that treats one side differently than others is unjust. Mass media is unjust; the current political system is unjust; popular culture is unjust. Whether or not this can be changed, the just man is not required to participate in unjust contests. Just as England won an Empire by controlling the seas with her navy, instead of by large land armies, there’s no law saying Rightists have to battle Leftists on the Left’s chosen ground. The Founders tried to get redress of grievances by petitioning King and Parliament. When they discovered that this was an unjust process, they moved their struggle from diplomacy and politics to the field of battle. That is the ultimate ‘just’ contest. Not necessarily even, but just, in that each side throws everything it can muster into the fray, and fights it out to a decision. No time-outs, no referees, no instant-replays.

I think you are completely missing the significance of the “devil on a cross” statement. The cross isn’t about punishment, it’s about nobility and accepting responsibility. The devil won’t be put on a cross, because he isn’t responsible for anything; it’s always another person’s fault. Further, there is no point trying to put the devil on a cross, because it won’t change him or anyone else. If you let questionable or evil actions pervert you into committing similarly questionable or evil actions, the devil, or to be direct your opponent, wins. Decorum is its own defense against the chaos these people want to impose by acting chaotically. If you prove that things can’t be civil by giving in and using their tactics, they will win the sanctioned, regimented society they think they want, because restricting thoughts and actions will be the only way to keep the peace.

There for a minute I thought you were describing the POTUS. A total lack of responsibilty, it is always someone elses fault, mudslinging, name calling, fingerpointing, eat your peas, promoting class warfare, cronyism politics, exective orders to by-pass out Constitution, etc. etc.,etc.

Weird? You must mean that he displays “common sense” when it comes to that matter. Do the math…did you ever take an economics course? Try Austrian instead of Keynesian economics, and you will see what is going on in this country.

When “they” say he is not supported, they mean he is not supported by the liberal media, who is blacking him out. Not supported by the Fed and the military industrial complex, who are scared to death of him. Not supported by those w/ not a lick of commonsense. If those who added the “but” would support him, he’d be #1 in ALL the polls.
Does anyone know, by the way, that Cain was the head of the Fed in Kansas City?
No wonder the “Bilderbergs” love him!

Well said! The most distressing thing about this primary season is the tendency of people to ignore the flaws in their preferred candidate and accentuate the faults of the others to cartoonish significance.

Although something about the latest allegations that make me incredibly suspicious is that they went from vague, could-have-been-offensive allegations all the way to molestation. That’s an awfully big jump in the allegation stage (inappropriate but non sexual hand gestures set off all the anti-PC flags I have) and with Gloria Allred there it’s all of the sudden groping.

I doubt many Republicans will give it credence, but then Republicans probably aren’t the target audience: independents and leftys are.

What an ignorant column. Thus far, there is nothing. Nothing! Showing any weakness to these people is fatal. Nobody is perfect. Winston Churchill said all there is to say on this: “Never give in. Never, never, never.”

I agree we should vet but we shouldn’t just throw our guys under the bus at the first sign of trouble either. Besides, if conservatives actually vetted their candidates then how do you explain how Romney is a front runner? What’s the point of vetting the background when we can’t even acknowledge the problems with their foreground. Shouldn’t the vetting process at least pull up some semblance of a conservative?

Keep the rules in mind. If both sides abide by the rules; then they apply. If one side breaks the rules, then justice allows, nay, requires, that the other side abandon the rules also, and fight no-holds-barred. This makes the fight fair (and just), and punishes the first side to break the rules, which is also required by justice. If the Left makes a strategy out of lying, then they’re operating outside the traditional rules. Therefore, the other side may, and must, fight them with any means at hand. The background of these Cain-accusers must be microscoped for any dirt. Their backers and enablers must be identified and dragged into the spotlight. Some might think tossing Cain overboard is the slick move, but that tells every possible future candidate not to bother running if he has any objection to having his good name smeared without resistance or retribution. Some of our talking-heads gripe about the current field of GOP candidates — how many good people are not running because they won’t sacrifice their reputations and families for a chance to win office? This is the real motive for the politics-of-personal-destruction, and I believe it has probably been effecting the GOP since Clarence Thomas, at least.

As the article notes Cain “denies” the allegations. Yet by asking him to “come fully clean” the article implies he is lying. Why should we believe that? Or should we just abandon every candidate as soon as someone, anyone, says anything negative about the candidate? That is a sure way to miss out on good candidates. (By the way, Cain is not my first choice. But so far I have seen nothing substantiated that would disqualify him. Just unsubtstiated allegations.)

There have been 3 women accusing him, two were paid off with a year’s salary. That doesn’t happen for no reason.

You know he’s lying.

You just don’t want to face the fact that you’re no different than the Clinton voters, you like his policies, you don’t care about his dick. Yep the fact that a lot (half? 3/4?) of his supporters feels like you do means that your party was hypocritical in a sense, attacking Clinton.

On the other hand it’s human that you have principles, you just don’t care about them when they hurt… You scream “unfair unfair, this time it affects me!”

I want to see Cain go because I hate his policies.

I’ve always thought that conservatives, at least people from conservative parts of the country anyway, love sexual sinners as much as bohemians do, they just demand that their sinners pretend to be ashamed.

Elvis was as dirty as any rock star, but as long as he didn’t flaunt it and dress up like Marylon Mason, the south loved him.

Funny thing though, Cain simply denies and changes his story all the time like a liar. He doesn’t say he’s sorry.

If the right doesn’t dump him, they’re going to have to admit that when the rubber meets the road they’re no different from that sinful rest of America they’re always saying will go to hell and deserves it.

Certainly Herman Cain should be held to the same standard that we conservatives apply to others. It is just hard sometimes to confront information that is contrary to one’s hopes.

But the equivalency that Josh Scholar asserts here is absurd. Bill Clinton DID engage in illicit behavior with Gennifer Flowers and Monica Lewinsky. That was proven. Ted Kennedy DID kill a woman due to his drunk driving and reprehensible behavior thereafter. In each case, Democrats rallied to the cause—despite the legitimacy of the allegations.

At present, Herman Cain MAY be guilty. We don’t know that he is, though his behavior has been suspect. As this story develops and IF it turns out that he is culpable, we will see conservatives hold Cain to the higher standard that Democrats have been unable or unwilling to apply to their own. Then the false equivalency asserted by Josh Scholar will be laid bare.

I don’t know he’s lying yet, Josh. None of Clinton’s accusers were anonymous, and they were all more credible than this one woman seems so far.

I’ll tell you this, though – if it turns out he did what this woman said (which isn’t nearly as bad as what Clinton did to the Widow Willy in the Oval Office a week after her husband’s death, don’t even mention Paula Jones or Juanita Broadrick), we’ll dump him.

We’ll wait for proof, though. We suspect people on your side are capable (gleefully so) of dropping 7 figures on a single mom to make up a story out of whole cloth. The anonymous crap we discount – well, everybody but PJM (what a great new name!).

You seem concerned about hypocrisy. That just makes us roll our eyes – hypocrisy cannot be separated from any human, and we’re no angels. You admire people who aren’t sorry when they’re caught in sin? That makes a virtue of sociopathy.

Charlie Rangel’s one of the 1%, what with all the bribes, cumshaw, graft, and kickbacks he gets above and beyond his exorbitant salary. He was Chairman of House Ways and Means, the King of the Tax Code, and it turned out he’d been cheating on his taxes for years. We’re not mad because he’s a hypocrite, though. We just think he should have paid his taxes.

One public accuser is a Democrat/progressive player. Mark my words, the others will be the same. Clarence Thomas all over again. And THAT little lying bitch has been making out well over the years, protected and rewarded by her communist/racist sponsors.

The problem, Josh, is that until Mr. Cain became the front-runner, NONE OF THESE THINGS WERE BROUGHT UP. That makes it suspicious. Had these matters been brought up as soon as Mr. Cain went on the ticket, I would have given them some credence, but that was not the case. It smells like a big pile of crap. And probably is.

Furthermore, companies and non-profit organizations usually do settle with claimants, whether the claimants are right or wrong, simply to avoid costly litigation (with outcomes that are not always just) and negative publicity.

A severance “agreement” is a “settlement.” A severance policy (i.e., a policy granting severance payments to employees who are let go for specified reasons) is not a settlment because it grants severance to all those qualifying employees. If a company gives severance to someone who does not qualify (or gives more than the employee is qualified for), then that’s a settlement agreement (sometimes called a severance agreement), and the consideration of the extra severance is usually given in exchange for a release. When a severance policy is followed, there is no agreement and, thus, no release.

But you’re right about many companies settling with claimants because litigation is so darned expensive. When companies do that, they develop a reputation, and the plaintiffs’ lawyers learn very quickly who to bring claims against (because they will settle even when the claim has little merit) and who not to bring claims against (because they will fight claims with little merit).

Yes, I too was sexually harassed by Josh Scholar, but was afraid to come forward. He tried to push my head down to his crotch in a parked car while trying to fondle my genitals. And it is true because he cannot prove me wrong.

When will you fing idiots get a brain? They were not paid off with a year’s salary to indicate that their charges were true. It’s a hell of a lot cheaper to give someone one or even two or ten years’ salary to get rid of them if they can’t be fired otherwise. Do you have any idea how many teachers, principals and superintendents of public schools we handle in the same way? We pay them off just to get them out of our school district. It happens all the time, an employee accuses someone in management of something that didn’t happen, then their union rep. tells us that they will accuse every one else they possibly can of the same thing if we don’t give them what they want.

Sometimes you just pay them off and tell them to go away and cause someone else the problem.

My ex used to pull stunts to “fall into” money he didn’t earn (hence the “ex” part). After our divorce, he alleged that the wife of the couple who owned the business employing him had sexually harassed him. Of course she hadn’t, so she and her husband were going to fight the allegation. But the business’s lawyers told them to settle—because they couldn’t prove it DIDN’T happen—and “mud sticks.” They settled for $150K. That’s the way it works.

Is Klavan telling us that we should automatically believe whatever garbage the leftist media throws at us? We might as well give up right now and get ready for Klavan to attend Romney’s (or Obama’s) coronation…uh…excuse me, inauguration.

The race card went overdrawn sometime in 2010. The same is happening to the sex card just about now.

Sharon Bialek couldn’t even read her script without giggling. She’s just an aging hustler out for her fifteen minutes of fame and some money.

Most likely, SHE offered sex in return for getting her job back (or in return for cash), and was rebuffed. Her ego couldn’t handle a little rejection, which explains why she is incompetent to hold down a sales/PR job for any length of time.

And Gloria Allred? No decent person, and for that matter, no sane person, would voluntarily remain in the same room with Gloria Allred, let alone transact business with her. Allred gives blackmailers and extortionists a bad name. She should have been disbarred a very long time ago.

Considering the Chicago connection, Rahm Emanuel most likely played some part in it too.

Okay, Klavan, suppose some leftist or other enemy decides to ruin your life by making obviously false accusations against YOU. If that happens, who will have your back, now that you’ve already thrown the entire Tea Party under the bus?

Not much to disagree with here. I would say though that the idea that our politicians have to be better than their politicians has to be elaborated upon. Since there is no evidence whatsoever all I expect from Cain is a denial. If he says he never bought the woman an apartment and it turns out he did then I’ll drop him. If he says he did get her a comp room as is common in the hospitality industry I won’t have a problem. If he says he acted boorishly and actually hit on the woman then that will have some effect but not as much as Newt going into his wife’s hospital room and telling her he wanted a divorce.
But what I don’t want to see is a polished politician skillfully lie his way out of this by parsing words and asking what the definition of is is. I don’t want the women viciously attacked in the skillfully political way Clinton attacked his accusers. That being said now that Herman is out front I really would like him to hire a better campaign team.

Jackie Gingrich Cushman recently wrote an article (you can find it on Townhall.com) laying that hospital/divorce story to rest — although it appears that few people actually read it. According to Jackie, her parents sat her and her sister down at their kitchen table and told them that they were getting a divorce. Jackie wrote that it was her mother (Gingrich’s first wife) who had requested the divorce. A few months later, her mother went into the hospital to have a tumor (which turned out to be benign) removed. While she was in the hospital, Newt Gingrich brought the two girls to the hospital to visit with their mother. The first Mrs. Gingrich (who is still alive, BTW) did not have cancer, and Gingrich did not ask his wife for a divorce during that hospital visit, as he and his wife had already agreed to divorce, months earlier.
Gingrich does not have a marital history to be proud of, but can we at least stop spreading these myths which make it sound worse than it really was?

Uh – that doesn’t clear Newt from other adulterous acts he has committed, including beginning an affair with ‘Callista the Queen Bee’ while still married. He’s a punk. A smart punk, but a punk just he same.

My grandmother, blessed be her name, was a saint, but that does not mean she’d be a great president.
We are not voting for the head of a religious movement.And truth be told, many world famous religious leaders-Martin Luther King comes to mind–weren’t saints either.

Rancher, being out on the range has given great clarity to your thoughts. This is the “baptism by fire” or the “walking on live coals” moment for Herman Cain. If he is to be our President, he must be able to deflect these accusations like water on a hot skillet. These are little people, ankle biters, if you will. He aspires to our mountaintop, let him swat these nats and move onward. Otherwise, he is not the man we thought him to be. I would love to have a slam dunk hero in this race…the perfect person. They just are not there.

Acting morally is usually discussed in terms of religion, but — setting aside religious aspects — a Darwinian moralist might point out that basic moral codes came to be universally acknowledged because they are pro-survival. The Darwinian moralist’s hypothesis would be that our ancestors who behaved morally were more likely to have good things happen to them in ways that limited human intelligence could not predict.

An example of how this could be true is to consider what, in hindsight, is most likely to have happened had the Democrats acted morally and forced Bill Clinton out of office after the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Then Al Gore would have rolled into the 2000 election with a year plus of being president. Does anyone doubt that, had he performed at all adequately in office, he would then have won the 2000 election? Remember how close he came to winning without having already been president. Then comes 9/11 on schedule, because bin Laden was not likely to have changed his plans, and then the Democrats with the backing of the MSM could have led the country during a quasi-wartime situation for however many years it took to bring the situation under control. In all probability Al Gore’s would have won re-election in 2004, and the Democrats would have ended up with multiple years in control of both houses of Congress and 9 or so years of Al Gore as president. They gave up all this by choosing to act in a sleazy way — letting Clinton act dishonorably by finishing out his second term.

Acting morally, no matter what, is the Republicans’ secret weapon and acting immorally is the Democrats’ Achille’s heel.

“Darwinian moralism”? What a pile of crap. Darwin opposed smallpox vaccinations and the construction of sewers in slums, that’s Darwin’s moralism. After proclaiming Natural Selection “inevitable”, he advocated measures to help it along!

Maybe you split your comment because your finger experienced a Darwinian twitch – or maybe it was a sign from St. Darwin that you will be naturally unselected.

I watched the press conference. The woman seemed pretty credible and detailed. I’m afraid Cain has some serious ‘xplainin’ to do.

Also, regarding coverage of the now four accusers, I think this is a very good thing it is happening now. If there is fire here – and it looks extremely likely that there is – it’s important this isn’t happening in August with Cain the nominee. Then we would be looking at Obama II.

Doubt it; I’m not going to submit this country to destruction because Cain didn’t live up to my moral code. I’d vote for Bill Clinton with all he has been proven to have done before I’d vote for Obama or even stay home. It’s hard to say where I would draw the line in voting for Obama, maybe if he was running against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. I think there are far more Americans who feel this way than the polls show.

IF ….. Cain should make it through the primary, you can bet that each of the women who now say they won’t identify themselves will be front and center in the Media + all the others that will “come forward”. No ….. it’s not “fair” that the media not only has a double standard, but acts as an Opposition arm for the Democrats. That’s the reality, the head in the sand approach is not going to win.

So ….. we are now looking at serious choices. Do we back Cain to the finish while the media continues to trickle out these women? OR ….. is it more important to win the White House? This is a no brainer to me.

I personally am not at all sure that we can survive a second Obama term without the constraints of a re-election campaign. He has done horrible damage to this country – we cannot take a chance on a possibly flawed candidate. This is now the 4th woman, two of the women have financial settlements. There will be more, either real or manufactured – count on it.

How in the world is she “credible?” Because she has a lawyer? She has NO evidence, NO witnesses, made NO complaint at the time. Is it that she’s a “registered Republican?” You mean like Obama’s ambassador to China or his Transportation Secretary?

I don’t see anything here. Just more unfounded allegations. If every member of NOW stepped forward to say the same thing, would you believe them? Of course not! There has to be some EVIDENCE.

Well, you may be right, but she did have affidavits from her boy friend and someone else at the time saying that she reported Cain’s behavior to them. That’s evidence she didn’t make this up out of whole cloth. Further, I’m interested in what she could have to gain by all this. The public scrutiny this woman will be under will be frightening – and for what?

This whole thing, from the scripted account shared by this woman to the alleged “affidavits” signed by these two other people, could readily be a setup. There really is no way to prove the validity of a story of this nature without having eyewitness accounts & written records.

If indeed this story is not true, Cain should lodge a slander lawsuit against this woman posthaste.

Yesterday, I read somewhere (might have been in a French paper, as I love in France) that the woman has refused to bring the matter to the courts, she looses all credibilty on that, she doesn’t have enough to get a conviction in court, so Allred’s holding court on television… Oh and I believe that this fourth declared woman is the third anonymous woman, the French journalists are only speaking of three complaints.

Gloria Allred is good at what she does. Also, some lawyers ignore the rules and will coach their clients in how to lie. Is she one of those? Dunno, but I am suspicious of anyone who seems to glom onto these cases, and always in persecution of Republican candidates.

Keep in mind this is alleged to have occured in 1999, a boom time, with low unemployment. Finding a job just wasn’t that difficult. Perhaps she was not a BLACK, WOMAN, LAWYER looking for a job with the government in DC like Anita Hill, but it wasn’t hard to find a job, and it wasn’t that hard to find a lawyer in 1999.

Of course Cain might say that she dressed provocatively, rearranged her clothes in front of him, and in the car she groped him, and he stopped her. She is the woman scorned.

We have just as much evidence either way. Makes more sense with her as the aggressor, she wanted a job, he had one, and being willing to perform extra services might make getting a job more likely for some people. If he had already turned her down, it couldn’t hurt to try out for another position, right?

Don’t know what the hotel room was supposed to do for anyone. What if he had changed her booking to a cheaper room? Does that make him look better or worse? Gloria is trying to send a message that if she tells the truth about having a hotel room, then she must be telling the truth about other things, which is not logical, but some will fall for it. That she is playing that kind of game means that she has no case.

‘Fire’ there? Cain’s only guilty of being a man – not a gentleman but neither a cad. When she said ‘no’ he obeyed. Even if her story is completely true, she was no longer her employer, making her fair game for a pass.

You haven’t lived in Chicago, have you? The place is truly foul. In the areas frequented by convention-goers (and in some other neighborhoods as well), if an unaccompanied male so much as stops his car without making sure the doors are securely locked and the windows rolled up, some floozy will ask him if he wants to “party.”

Here’s how hustlers operate: She offered sex in return for getting her job back, or perhaps for cash. He turned down the offer. She is too much an ego tripper to be able to handle rejection, which is why she can’t hold down a sales/PR job for very long.

Unfortunately, anyone who has served in a management position for many years has been exposed to this behavior. There’s always some floozy around who thinks she can create leverage for herself using her undoubtedly comely charms. Most managers are on to these scenarios and won’t be alone in a room with a female employee for love or money. Witnesses are essential. When the floozy strikes out, it’s a personal afront to her charms, and she switches into ‘get the bastard’ mode. They imagine that their co-workers will respect and fear them for their ability to manipulate the system and assume the powers of the weak. What they don’t realize is that they had better be very well paid for their one shot at this, because they’ll never work again. On the downside, they can often destroy one guy if upper management panics. Witnesses, witnesses, witnesses!

Yeah, like the Republican guy from Illinois Jack Ryan that was running against Obama in Obama’s one and only Senate race, where Ryan’s sealed divorce record containing alleged sexual improprieties was mysteriously leaked to the press after the primary had already been completed. Obama won that election against a hastily arranged marginal Republican thus sealing our current fate. As has just happened with Cain, Republican’s should be wary as they go forward. The Dems are likely to be more desperate than ever so the ever naive self mutilating Republican’s should be well warned that Obama’s well oiled Chicago style opponent destruction machine will be out for blood once again (I did not have time to go into what happened to opponents in Obama’s state senate races.). I am thinking they feared Cain so much taking such a bite out of Obama’s core competency, i.e., being black, that this time they struck early. Imagine what they will attempt to do with the Morman angle. Do you think they will let Obama’s strange religious past be a deterrent? Not on your life.

At which point and idea, Newt becomes ever more viable since we already know what he’s done. And since those actions he has converted to catholicism and has been straight arrow, sins forgiven. We can actually go by his record of accomplishment and promises.

Now wait. How can you believe this woman? Just think of the sexual approach she says happened. It is impossible. You would have to be a guy to understand that you can’t go for genitals at the same time you are pusshing someones head into your lap. You can’t do that.

I couldn’t have explained the way it is any better than the author. People who frequent this site are clamoring and whining about the double-standard and the fact that a conservative medium has the audacity to hold Herman Cain accountable. Huh? I don’t care which conservative talk show host is demanding the facts in full before taking a position…nor do I care which of them are running interference and crying “double standard”…We could do that all day long…Just pick a topic for crying out loud….any topic!

Guilty people are sometimes unfairly presumed to be guilty. I suspect as much in this case. Folks jumped to the correct conclusion…unfairly. Herman Cain was prematurely and unfairly accused…of doing what he actually did….sexually harass multiple women using his professional position as a calling card. The fact that Herman Cain was treated differently than Bill Clinton or Jesse Jackson doesn’t excuse him, nor does it mean he gets a free pass for his behavior….it just points to that age-old, yet reliable quotation…”two wrongs don’t make a right”….or three, or four, etc…..

No we shouldn’t be UNFAIR to Herman Cain. We should be FAIR with him. Until and when actual evidence comes forth that proves beyond any doubt he is guilty – let alone what he is actually accused of doing (Bialek notwithstanding) – he should be defended vigorously.

If the charges are actually presented and proven, then and only then should he be abandoned.

This is still a witch hunt. I stand with Cain, whether or not I may or may not support his candidacy based on substantive issues.

Herman Cain took the “shocked and surprised road” initially…then he took a detour on the “denial road”….Now, he’s turned onto the “defiance road”….I am afraid that a U-turn is right around the corner…with a quick exit onto “Folks, we gotta talk road”. Sorry….don’t want to hear it…Herman…just go home…quietly…and take the road named “wife of 43 years”.

These settlement agreements are common in industry. Why? Because its cheaper to pay the woman off with a few thousand dollars than to fight the he said/she said in court. And with a Jury Trial, one is never certain to win (even if the
defendant is innocent or perhaps, misunderstood). And with Gloria Aldred (the woman who never misses a chance to get in front of a camera), it raises my suspicion even more. If there isn’t any more “evidence” than this, I personally will give Herman the benefit of the doubt. If nothing else to stick it to the Marxist Media who hide the Left’s misdoings while playing wrecking ball with our candidates.

Jesse Jerkson is still sought out as a spokesman inspite of calling NYC, Hymie Town and fathering a love child. HIs son JJ, Jr. is known to have ushered in WHITE women visitors. Al (no so) Sharpton caused a riot in a store which resulted in death and engineered the Tawana Brawley scam and yet he, too is sought out as a spokesman. Bill Clinton was a serial womanizer and Al Gore chased the massage lady around the table. Yuk to all of them (and pass the sanitizer).

Do you really believe that? Would you kindly explain why this woman who attends Tea Party events came out and said the things she did? That Clinton did worse is not an answer. I don’t know about you, but I fear a second Obama administration and thank my lucky stars that Cain is being vetted hard now.

And to Rob Crawford above, as of now I am not supporting another candidate. I simply want the truth on Cain.

As for Cain, he has hordes of upright people who worked with him at the NRA who have only the highest things to say about him. These are character endorsements. I weigh them far more heavily than the belated charges of some woman who had been fired and seems to be looking for some payback or payday.

I am Cain fangirl, but I will withdraw my support the instant I feel the proof is undeniable. This account interests me greatly, because she was at the Tea Party event and did not seem particularly upset or even serious while talking to Mr. Cain.

Conservatives are going to have to compromise on something in their candidate; ideology, morality, debating skills, experience, political literacy, consistency, likability, something. Not one of them has it all. Why do we act as if all but our favorite are the second coming of Satan.

I’m opposed to Cain’s candidacy but not because of these allegations, because he isn’t qualified and has a bad plan. Even so, I wish he would learn how to rebut the charges better. It’s becoming embarrassing, and it’s going to hurt them all.

You know, I get the unfairness of it all, and to a point I’m okay with it. Here’s where I stop being okay with it: when the media we are supposed to be able to trust to vet ALL of the candidates fails, and not only fails but gets in bed with a candidate leading to the destruction of what most of us grew up to know as America.

I don’t expect the media to be perfectly unbiased but I expect them to try. They’re not even trying and worse yet, they are trying to destroy their competitors who are.

Should it ever come to pass that it’s the conservatives who bring the pitchforks and shotguns, the tar and the feathers to the Beltway, then their first targets need to be the Main Stream Media.

People who frequent this site are clamoring and whining about the double-standard and the fact that a conservative medium has the audacity to hold Herman Cain accountable. Huh?

A democrat with connections leaves a girl in a locked car at the bottom of a lake and takes a 1 a.m. ferry back across the inlet to clean up at his hotel and casually have breakfast with some guy the next morning at 7 a.m.

Said democrat goes on to a long career in the Senate where he’s respectfully referred to as “The Lion”.

A sitting President diddles an intern with cigars in the Oral Office, proceeds to lie about it under oath, and the only drumbeat you hear from the MSM is that sex is no big deal.

John Edwards diverts campaign funds in an elaborate scheme to cover up his Baby Daddy status and you hear nary a peep in mainstream media.

A married Al Gore, who will forever be known as a “crazed sex poodle”, assaults a masseuse (a real one, not a prostitute parading as a masseuse) in his hotel room and she’s made to feel like a liar.

Politico has run close to 100 stories on the unproven allegations against Cain in one week.

Like I replied to another post, Lie Detector Tests are easy to spoof, whether you are taking the test or giving the test. Sitting there with a tack in your shoe can give you the false readings you need to make lies look like the truth and vice versa. Anyone good at bio feedback can also spoof the test. Since it’s a mechanical test, the person setting up the machine can make it do whatever they want it to do.

I’m disappointed at PJ Media’s handling of this story. Why are you giving so much credence to the MSM claims by playing defensively? So many of us see this for what it is, an attempt to divert attention away from the real issues. The fact that ambulance chaser Gloria Allred is on the case should tell you all about the motives of the accusers. In fact, I’m making another contribution to Cain’s campaign.

“It’s the price you pay for defending what’s true and good, the price of holding yourself to a high moral standard”…DO you actually believe that the GoP is white and pure as new snow on a crisp winter’s morning? Spare me the party propaganda as I fail to see much difference in either party’s stooges once they’re no longer in front of a camera. It’s all one big happy backroom deal these days and actions speak louder than words.

Mr. Klavan, once again you are spot on. When we compromise our integrity and respond in kind with tactics the Democrats use, we have lowered our standards to their level. It’s far better to lose honestly than to win by cheating and deception. At the end of the day, I am content.

Up until now it was easy to dismiss the sexual harassment allegations because the accusers refused to step forward. Even though she is represented by Gloria Allred, Sharon Bialek’s allegations cannot be simply ignored. If true, Cain is unfit for public office. And, yes, the hypocrisy of the press that gave Bill Clinton (Jones, Wiley, Broaddrick), at al., a pass still rankles.

“Stepping forward” or not, the accuser is still pretty easy to dismiss, given the lack of evidence and corroboration, and given her taste in attorneys. There’s every reason to take her assertions with a pillar of salt.

I’ll take it all back if she can provide something more substantive, but if Democratic operatives were to attempt a groundless “dirty tricks” frame-up, in collaboration with a press desperate to be gulled, it would look precisely like this. PRECISELY.

This is starting to look bad for the Hermanator. I realize that all of these women could be lying, I don’t put anything past a liberal’s attempt to lie and destroy a good conservative or get five minutes of fame, but still… I’ll give Cain a 55/45 pass at this point.

I realize that all of these women could be lying, and I don’t put anything past a liberal’s attempt to lie and destroy a good conservative or get five minutes of fame, but still…

Look in the mirror, and realize that your reaction is exactly what Politico wanted when they ran their evidence-free story. As another Democrat leader once said, “I don’t care if it’s true — make the son of a bitch deny it!”

Cooperating in a slander is not holding ourselves to a higher standard. It’s holding ourselves to a lower one, in order to obtain the egoboo of acceding to conventional wisdom.

“See, we’re good, reasonable people! Responsible media people! We despise Cain just like all of you do!” Investigate? Think critically about the nature and timing of the accusations? At least try to come to the truth of the matter? Nahhhh. Doesn’t have the same opportunities for self-aggrandizement.

Now I do not know whether the accusations are true. I have my doubts for various reasons (Journolist, timing relative to Cain’s rise in the polls, the extreme nature of the details of this latest accusation, the fact that no one seems to have heard a peep about this before now, Gloria Allred). But I don’t know, and calling for people to be deliberately unfair to someone who’s under attack and whose guilt is very doubtful rubs me the wrong way. Should we be “unfair” to other accused? How long until we find ourselves deliberately cooperating in accusations that are known to be false?

While presuming Cain not-guilty until proved guilty he has demonstrated that he is not ready to take on Barak Obama and the $1B politics-of-personal-destruction war machine of the Left – they will eat him alive – if with nothing else his wildly-erratic record as a liberal-moderate-conservative in prior campaigns in 1999 and 2004.

Cain has supported affirmative action and Federal interference in the workplace based on race but opposed school choice vouchers (he was endorsed by Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow PUSH organization).

Cain has supported nationalization of banks and criticized opponents of the bailout, calling them “free market purists” and declared that they had “no valid criticisms”.

Cain’s 9-9-9/9-0-9/3-3-3 scheme is a stalking horse for a 30% European-style national sales tax – but he is keeping that unpopular notion quiet in his fund-raising ads and campaign speeches. (It’s in his book.)

Cain took Godfather’s down from a $130m company to a $30m company during his stewardship at Pillsbury – then he left with the badly damaged company. Contrary to his claims it was never “near bankruptcy” prior to his leadership.

“The fight for truth, liberty and morality requires sacrifice and self-examination. The self-righteous quest for power over others does not.”

Well, when you find St. Francis of Assisi running for president, give me a shout. I think the difference between Democrats and Republicans is that with Democrats the ends justify the means. Clinton was the biggest womanizer going, but he had a successful economy and people were making lots of money. So he stayed in office. Jimmy Carter was devoted to his wife and never had any personal scandals to deal with, but he had a lousy economy and high unemployment, so he had to go. So, to Democrats, you could basically be a rapist (which was one of the charges made against Bill Clinton), but as long as you brought home the bacon you are fine with them. Results matter, morality does not.

With Republicans, you have some really nice guys, but it doesn’t really matter to the people, either. Nobody could doubt how devoted George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, and John McCain were to their wives, but they were still losers. Perhaps if they were as mean and nasty as the Democrats, they would have won their elections, regardless if they were faithful to their wives or not.

Like I said, St. Francis ain’t on the ballot and I want the toughest person there is to beat Obama into the ground in 2012. I don’t know if Cain is the man, but at this stage of the game I could care less who our candidate went to bed with or tried to go to bed with. I just want a winner and I want the Democrats to know that WE are going to play the game at their level. I’ll worry about my soul later. Right now the country is in deep, deep, trouble and we need a lion to get us out of it. St. Francis or no St. Francis.

The pity is the piling on by the idiot supporters of other primary candidates. Are you so desperate for “your” guy to win that you’ll poison the chances of the possible VPs or future candidates? Are you so convinced of the purity of “your” candidate that you’ll go along with obvious lies and half-truths?

Here’s a hint: when the decision is made, and the Republicans have a candidate, the press will savage him. They will find people willing to say all manner of evil about the candidate, his religion, his business practices, his personal hygiene, the behavior of his children, the behavior of his pets, and the particular tailoring of his suits and how that makes it obvious he’s a fascist religious fanatic who will march the country into endless war and turn the planet into a lifeless desert flooded by the melted icecaps.

And you’ll have made their lies more credible by having so gleefully wallowed in their filth now. You’ll have made it harder to point out the collusion within the press, the amazing simultaneity of their “independent minds” coming up with the same wording for their talking points.

For what? For the chance for your candidate, who is just marginally different than the others, to be the ‘winner’?

By all means, we should vet our candidates. But that does not mean we should join the press in lynching them.

I so wanted to disagree with this article and I just can’t….we are the “good guys”………but unless there is more definitive proof I will support Cain, not polished , not perfect, but real. And real is missing in DC. I

Herman Cain can sue this woman for slander and libel…Or, better yet, leave that to Mrs. Cain…his “wife of 43 years”…If a person did that to you, and you were innocent…wouldn’t you sue her? Don’t think that lawsuit’s coming…

Probably not, because you still have to prove the allegation in court if you sue and just like the woman’s side, Cain will not have any evidence to prove that it’s untrue. It’s virtually impossible to prove a negative.

So, what happens when Gloria Allred hires 8 more women to make allegations, without proof, against the rest of the GOP primary field? Are we required to take them all at face value, reject all 9 candidates, and vote for Obama?

Is that what we’ve come to: “Evil always wins because Good is Dumb?” (ht Spaceballs).

No, Rancher, as I recall from the press conference she said herself that she saw Cain again about a month ago at a Tea Party event when he admitted to recognizing her but looked uncomfortable – no surprise there..

You keep attacking Allred. Fine. I don’t like her either. But none of that means the woman wasn’t truthful. Don’t kill the messenger who brings the bad news. Now there are four. There may be more or one of the others may come out and identify themselves. This does not look good and the conservative side should take breath. As Andrew Klavan ightly says, the double-standard is not sufficient reason to give Cain a pass. Indeed it would be self-destructive.

We should not give Cain a pass, we should keep the microscope on all of the GOPs. However we should give him at least the benefit of doubt. So far all we have are allegations and nothing to get our teeth into. Something has been niggling in the back of my head….why was this woman fired? Why did the accusation of groping occur after she was fired? Did Cain fire her, or did she perceive him as the reason for her firing? Too many questions and not enough answers. It smells like a smear to me at this point.

That does lend a little more credibility than if Allred had said it but it’s still her word against Cain’s. It just doesn’t seem to jive with what so many people have said about Herman, that he could be so crude, not to mention dumb, without having most people who know him say, “Yeah, I can believe that.”

I am incredibly disappointed in Pajamas Media, a site that was born of the idea of challenging the veracity of mainstream media fabrications, when it traffics in the garbage spewed by Gloria Allred, who has a long history of sham PR stunts. Now, Pajamas Media is the mainstream medi. It aspires to Ruling Class credentials. And we are supposed to believe that conservatives operate by a higher standard?. Forget Herman Cain. Pajamas Media – where are your journalistic ethics? Where is your honor?

“Now there are four.” No, there is one, Mr. Simon. Anonymous cranks should carry no weight, especially at Pajamas – er, PJM.

(How many times did I sit through your intro to Ed Driscoll’s podcasts, telling us about how Pajamas got its name – the Dan Rather thing. Maybe it’s the same guy who phonied Texas National Guard docs, but he put on a dress to “fool” the Politico guys.)

And the idea that this accuser is TEA Party is being debunked, right here on this page by Pajama’s contributor Clarice Feldman in her reply to comment #44.

The author is right. Conservatives should resign as soon as untrue allegations are made, because we are better. Sarah Palin should have committed hari-kiri as soon as she was accused of being married to the father of Bristol’s baby. Clarence Thomas should have walked away from the Supreme Oourt nomination when he was accused of talking about pubic hairs. Newt Gingrich should have stepped down fromSpeaker when he was accused of using donated money to teach a class about American history and exceptionalism. Ronald Reagan should have crawled under his bed when he was accused of being a cowboy dunce. George HW Bush should have quit as President when he was accused of a European affair. Any Republicans who is accused by a Liberal of bad conduct should withdraw permanently from public life because they have upset liberals – and RINOs – by being conservative. This strategy, as outlined by Andrew Klavan, is the only way for conservatism to triumph.

I read the article. I used to believe we were the good guys. Now, I look at “us” and I see the enemy. I see conservative publications participating in the high tech lynching. The lynching with zero evidence. I hear people like Bill Kristol and David Brooks and sites like PM, pushing these stories despite the lack of details. I see the conservative media joining forces with the mainstream media. And all this happening, conveniently when Cain happens to be on top. No reporting of this earlier. Has Pajamas Media carried the Larry Sinclair story about Obama’s homosexual liaisons? Have they repeated it for good measure? Has Pajamas Media carried the stories about Anthony Weiner’s wife’s rumored relationship with Hillary? Why just Herman Cain? Why stories that cat be corroborated? And why are the good media not acting good?

I think you’re missing the salient point this article’s author is trying to make, which to my mind is as follows: As deplorable as the perpetual double standard we are consistently witness to from our esteemed brethren on the left, this is no reason to abandon the standards we conservatives hold dear.

I understand the authors point. What I don’t understand is the supposed conservatives who are supplying the rope and firing up the lynch mob. If we are so good, why are conservatives taking part in this atrocity?

Can you point me to hard evidence (if any) that shows incriminating activity emanating from any officials on our side that is designed to undermine or destroy Cain’s presidential candidacy? Just providing a list of people who worked in the past for Cain who are now working with competing Pubbie candidates’ campaigns isn’t quite enough.

Let’s see. Karl Rove used these stories to trash Cain. David Brooks and Bill Kristol did the same thing yesterday, making snarky comments about how this shows he is not a professional. (thank God). The unsupported allegations have been carried repeatedly by Pajamas Media, with warnings that Cain’s candidacy is now damaged by the seriousness of these charges, though there is zero evidence after a full week. Beyond that, where is the conservative defense against these unsupported allegations. When Clarence Thomas faced the high tech lynching from the Left, at least he had John Danforth to defend him. And Orrin Hatch. And several others. Where are the conservative opinion leaders with guts and courage to defend a brother conservative from a pack of wild rabid media dogs? Except for Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin, are there any conservatives up to the challenge of stopping another lynching? I don’t see them at Pajamas Media, with the exception if Clarice Feldman, who has more cajones than the guys I read there. Pretty sad state of affairs? We are heading into the dirtiest campaign in our history, and our guys want to get along with those who would destroy every one of us.

Anyone else getting tired of the frakking neocons going after Cain because he’s not up to speed on their World Police foreign policy agenda but trying to pretend that it’s for any other worthless reason they can pull out of their posteriors?

In the Marine ‘Corpse’ there is a saying “Life’s a bitch and then you die” the point being that Herman has to tough it out while putting out facts, ’cause ain’t nothin’ fair anymore. My attitude has been corroded by the progs enough that if the facts, as readily ascertained by Herman’s presentation, meets my jaundiced criteria then he has my vote.

What has happened so far that would make you not root for Cain? Rumors, innuendo, and unsubstantiated allegations? Harden your heart, make a stand, and if it turns out these are true…THEN tar, feather, and move on. How’s that quote by Paine go? ‘Summer soldier’ and ‘sunshine patriot’ and all that.

Here’s an exercise you can do to realize how ridiculous things are: write down all the facts as we know them…

3 Anonymous accusers of sexual harassment
1 accuser of sexual assault
2 harassment accusers were paid off in a fairly benign settlement, an internal investigation indicated at least one incident was bogus
Only one accusation is from within the last 10 years
The assault accuser did not file anything with the police or the courts.
In no case was Cain actually confronted with his behavior by the accusers and given the opportunity to apologize and correct himself (which should be the first action any time someone feels harassed, period).

There has been no hard evidence that Cain has actually done anything wrong! Someone above mentioned something about signed affadavits from this assault case, but those are from people whom the accuser TOLD the story to. I’m not a lawyer, but isn’t evidence given on behalf of an accuser based on a statement by the accuser hearsay?

So in conclusion, don’t be a summer soldier/sunshine patriot. Support Cain until you feel the evidence proves he acted in the wrong.

and it sure does seem strange that these women came out of the ‘woodwork’ only when Cain seemed to be doing well in polls

I don’t know, Delia. It seems entirely possible, given our knowledge of human nature, for a person to sit and wait for years in hopes of finding the perfect chance to utterly f__k over and ruin the life of another person whom she perceives to have wronged her.

They’d better get started accusing Romney of sexual harassment right away – so that can be over before October-surprise time next year.

The other possibility is to say “so what” and go ahead and vote for a harasser – the country will be better off when the Racist and Sexual Harassment accusation-bombs have been rendered useless. It would have been terrible to have the country deprived of the talents of Clarence Thomas just because of an accusation of SH.

It has nothing to do with us being the good guys. If we had a fair and balanced media, both sides would have to live up to the same standards. Because the Democrats have the three major arms of popular culture (media/academia/entertainment industry) in their corner, they feel emboldened to act like dishonest slezebags, while Republicans have to be as pure as the driven snow.

To claim that it is the natural order of things for our side to bear the burden of being better than our opponents, is to concede that Liberals using popular culture institutions as propaganda tools is something that must be accepted as permanent and unchangeable. If that’s the case, why bother having a Conservative New Media? Just so we can talk amongst ourselves?

When there’s 50 stories about Herman Cain being accused of sexual harrassment within the first 3 days of the story breaking, and only 1 or 2 stories about all of Clinton’s accusers during that same time period, that tells us that there’s something seriously wrong with how the media is covering politics.

You’re basically telling us to just suck it up and have our side be better than the other guys, and just accept this double standard. I doubt Andrew Breitbart would agree with you on this.

I couldn’t agree with you more Fop. The Leftist/Democrat controlled media is the greatest threat this country has ever faced. Along with its control of the education system it’s as if we’ve been taken over by a hostile power. I don’t know how we fix this (actually I do but can’t say – not being coy – just don’t want to get in trouble) but if we don’t, we don’t survive as a country.

Andrew, I’m surprised you are entertaining this attempt at misdirection.

Herman Cain is the candidate that is the least tied to the professional/political complex … and refuses to play by its rules.

He has the potential to totally upset the games of the DC political league … and his opponents know it, fear it, and are trying to stop him the only way they can … by the generous application of the same intellectual dishonesty that they used to advance their resumes and bank accounts at our expense.

That intellectual dishonesty is REAL … and it is the greatest threat to our continued existence as a nation of liberty and enterprise.

Yes, we need to be better than they are.

Let’s start with being intellectually honest with ourselves, wait for some FACTS to be presented before we throw Mr. Cain under the bus … and NOT LET THE DC WEASELS AND THE JACKALS OF THE FOURTH ESTATE DISTRACT US FROM PUTTING AN END TO THEIR POLITICS-AS-USUAL VIA GOTCHA! POLITICS!

I spit on the notion that we must prove ourselves by judging our candidates on a lower standard of proof than we demand of others. It’s a losers credo designed to feel morally superior while denying your allies assistance when they need it .
In any event the degree of effectiveness of the lies is established in your own post.

This is false:”Mark Foley sent suggestive emails to male pages”. The emails were to FORMER pages, now adults, who willingly entered into these late night email exchanges with Foley.

Hear! Hear! Rush Limbaugh has been saying for years that too often Republicans have cowered at the slightest accusation of wrongdoing and abandoned good people to the liberal mob for fear of the mob turning on them. The Left is composed of bullies and punks. What I see is three accusations leveled by people who won’t do so publicly and one accuser represented by media whore Gloria Allred.

Yes, life’s unfair. Yes, the party of scandal-vetted candidates is better than the party of covered-for candidates.

PJM’s story was still despicable. Unsourced attacks should not be published by reputable news outlets, no matter how hot the story is or who else does it. (If all PJM wants is hits, two words for you: Nude Celebs. Classier than Pollock’s piece, and you’d really be on the map.)

If we accept unsourced allegations about our candidates as legitimate news stories, then we enable every crank with a hate-on and too much time on his hands to distract debate and cripple a candidate. Surely you see this, Mr. Klavan.

Now that Cain has an accuser to face, let’s cover this story. Let’s get to the bottom of things – who’s lying?

The only reason I’m back here is that I followed a link to Klavan – think of switching to another site, please. Some guy named Pollock has trashed this one’s rep.

I have been reaching out to my other friends in the Chicago TEA Party and so far no one recognizes her. Gloria Allred portrayed Bialek as a TEA Party Republican. Having seen her picture Bialek is not someone who goes unnoticed easily.

Tucker comments further:

I have spoken at Tea Party events ALL OVER Chicagoland including TeaCon Midwest 2011 where Gloria Allred says her client “confronted” Herman Cain. I have never seen nor have I ever even heard of a Sharon Bialek.”

I spit on the notion that we prove our moral superiority by abandoning our troops when they are being attacked by jackals. We can and should afford them the same right to demand their accusers prove their charges, just as we would not level false charges against our opponents expecting that would be the end of them.

You are wrong on Foley, too, His suggestive emails were to adults, former pages, but adults who entered into these exchanges willingly. At least you didn’t repeat the preposterous charge that Hastert was covering for a pedophile.

Here’s a history of that case and several others showing how much hooey has been spread out on the public record and , worse, stuck.

Sharon Bialek made one interesting statement in her press conference. She said she was “putting a name and a face” on this sort of conduct. Isn’t that the main reason the MSM is saying that Politico’s been having a hard time with their story?

This whole thing smells. Notice the escalation of the allegations: when allegations of ‘physical gestures that were not overtly sexual’ didn’t knock off Cain, out come the bigger accusations. If this doesn’t take him out then I have no doubt that the next step will be to trot out some woman who claims that she bore Cain’s lovechild.

How the hell did this single mom afford to retain Gloria Allred????? How did they even find each other?

Third: so I’m supposed to believe that his MO with three women was ‘physical gestures that were not overtly sexual’ but then changed completely and started shoving women’s’ faces into his crotch?

Finally, I understand that the latest accuser has a 13 year old child. Do the math.

Fox isnt really “right wing” anymore.But when someone on our side screws up,I expect us NOT to show them favorites like the Left does.I personally think all of this is screwing up the most important campaign in our lifetime.Cain needs to come clean.

Can’t be proven or disproved. It is here say and by association with the known dirtbags that have proven themselves to be dishonest and despicable human beings this woman has NO credibility to start with. She is all theater of the absurd. She says she will not bring this to court. Why? BECAUSE it cannot be proven. Pure Alinsky. She is no more a “republican” than Obama is. And from chicago???

Sure vet Mr. Cain. If he lies then write the truth and call him out. But this is all just throwing crap from the monkey cage.

What I noticed about the woman was two things: She emphasized the luridness of it all which doesn’t jive with the my assessment of the dignity of Herman Cain. Secondly, she looks like a Clinton bimbo which leads me to believe that this is something out of the Left’s playbook on the art of smearing.

As far as we Know President Nixon never cheated on his wife, we have very few indications of affairs or sexual assaults….yet he was one of the most corrupt presidents in our Nation’s History. Ambassadorships were freely sold to the highest bidder, and his association with organized crime and criminals is well documented.

The Petro-Dollar system he and Kissinger Created began is the reason we are in such dire straights today, and will ultimately force the collapse of the US dollar.

Yet he maintained fidelity in Marriage and has no credible reports of sexual trysts….Bravo.

That’s just silly. Nixon, one of the most corrupt in history? Was he the guy who sold rocket-tech to China for campaign cash and erected the Gorelick Wall to keep the CIA from telling the FBI about it?

“Freely” sold? What a stupid modifier. Presidents always reward campaign contibutors with ambassadorships to less sensitive countries, all Presidents. It’s Dems of late, like Clinton, who put hacks into hot spots (like Taiwan), because they’ve run short of patronage plums.

I’m sorry, but this type of behavior has been taken off the table by the MSM and Liberals. It is not longer relevant. It is no longer a significant charge. If they can ignore corruption, rape, adultery and even manslaughter on their side why can’t I ignore unsubstantiated claims from their side? And Gloria Allred representing? That woman has NO credibility!
So Andrew I disagree slightly. I don’t think we should turn away from each viable candidate becuse they happen to live up to the liberals standard and not necessarily up to ours.
But I don’t disagree with this: “The world is just as unfair as you think it is. You’ll never catch the devil hanging on a cross.” Beautifully written!

Okay – let me get this straight…this happened in a car, right? There are a couple things I find confusing:

(1) was all this fondling preceded by a kiss or a few, etc.? Call me old-fashioned, but it would seem to be the usual way that intimacies begin…the kissing, foreplay, etc., which might be interpreted as an indication of some interest and/or consent.

(2) I may have to research the Kama Sutra on this second one, but the description provided sounds awkward as hell. One hand on her leg – going for the genitals – while simultaneously the other hand is trying to move her head to his crotch. It doesn’t make lot of sense…unless the hand-to-genitals thing was working so well that he decided to go for the money shot. I’ll need to see if I can get a willing gal to help me test this out ‘scientifically’.

Mssrs Klavan and Simon: I enjoy both your columns and vids on PJTV. How about a compromise? Let’s say you’re right that we are the good guys and have to uphold a higher standard. But let’s also acknowledge that the liberals are THE BAD GUYS! Let’s all stop calling them “our liberal friends”. They are not our friends. They don’t care how many bodies (both real and figurative) they have to stomp across to acquire even one more mote of power. The only difference between them and Stalin, Mao, etc is opportunity.

“We have to be unfair” is a ridiculous way to express your opinion that we shouldn’t rush into knee-jerk defense. We have to be duly diligent and not rush into early judgement or get embroiled in argument without credible substantiation. That is why PJM’s postings on the Cain Mutiny are a big disappointment to me.

I. We d not know the truth. We only have claims and allegations. That payments were made to avoid litigation does not prove the accused was guilty. Many false allegations are made with the expectation of such a pay-off.

2. One of the basics of embarking on an important campaign is recognizing that your opponents are certain to drag up
every detail of your past and, therefor, bringing out every critical item up front. Obama didn’t do that with the Rev. Wright which a almost derailed him. Cain demonstrated his political naivety : a very honest man,he had not made overt passes and, since no charges had been made, decided not to mention the false allegations. Bad judgement or bad counsel, but not proof of wrong-doing. It is an error that has brought down many decent and innocent men – under-estimating the malevolence of Socialist activists.

The followers of Alinsky are masters of this style of character assassination, They are rapturously hugging each other for having shot down a viable conservative candidate and saved the black vote. Cain doesn’t have a hope in Hell for the candidacy now. PJM’s rationale for piling in on this filthy ploy escapes me.

Time to be a tv detective. This woman claims Cain put his hand up her skirt and pushed her head into his crotch while sitting in the front seat of a car. That sort of thing was possible when I was a boy in high school long ago and cars had bench seats. You could slide over and have fun. Try the exercise today in a car with bucket seats. There’s a console and transmission stick between the driver and passenger. Now try that manuver. It’s really, really awkward. Left hand under the skirt and right holding the head, without banging her head into steering wheel? Right hand under the skirt and left on the head is even less believable.

I thought we were beyond the point where we lynched black men on the basis of some blond pointing at them and saying “a black man did it”. With white men or liberal black men we require proof. Herman Cain deserves the same courtesy.

The women is apparently from Chicago. She had legal dealings with a David Axelrod who’s office is 3-5 miles from the other David Axelrod (meaning they know each other since they use the same courthouses and are probably members of the same bar – if in fact they aren’t relatives). That is too much coincidence.

Given that this is after work and a dinner that probably included wine – after 13 years he won’t remember this at all and her memory of the dinner is going to be selective. Memories change with time – that is why we record testimony.

Liberals (including NOW and most of the media) get no say in this since they must apply the standard they used for Bill.

Over 20% of rape reports are “incorrect”. Given as a CEO that he is going to have hundreds of women who have an ax to grind with him it isn’t going to be hard to find a handful that will lie about it or misunderstand a meeting. Herman Cain is purported to be a kind and generous man so unfortunately there probably going to be evidence of a quid pro quo that is actually proof of virtue.

Get something fresh (this century), with corroboration, or move on. We stopped lynching black liberals in the last century. Let’s stop lynching black conservatives in this century.

Good piece, Andrew. Couldn’t agree more. I tend to think there’s an ongoing pattern to Cain’s suggestive behavior over the years. But it’s a much more serious issue if he completely denies it. If it’s true, he can’t be a viable candidate and we can’t let him.

Thanks. There are so many of us who wish we could finally, with stainless-steel tight logic, point out the dishonesty of those who are in positions of influence. Thank you for doing it for us all. When will any of them stand still for 15 minutes and try to supply answers to the questions this essay poses? I’d pay to see that.

I find it rather confusing that there are nearly 10 separate incidences wherein Cain was accused of misconduct. Confusing because it is all coming out at the same time in a wave…something seems odd about it…almost like, dare I say it, that none of it is true?

This article the best I’ve read in forever.. bravo.. and thank you .. it was wonderful and I’m going to use that last sentence .. funny how I’ve never seen that one before but it is absolutely appropo.. most excellent..

RETLAW, you must be very young to not know Nixon’s background…his associations were with organized Crime, millions in cash were delivered to him for appointments overseas, his dealings with organized crime are well documented…but it is the conversion of US dollar to a Petro Dollar that sealed this Nation’s fate, one of the most damaging acts by a US president in our history.
Until the Nation faces this fact and deals with it, we will only see worsening economic environment until markets forces collapse it.

The problem is you see republicans as one side, and democrats as another. Take a few months off and work in Washington DC. You will soon realize there is no us and them politically, there is only power and Money…it is dividing this power and money up that drives politics in this Nation.
The pendulum swings from conservative causes to liberal causes, and each swing creates opportunity to make money lobbying and advocating for your side.

I wish he would just move on and get out of the race. He’s a horrible candidate. Health problems, cheating problems, playing the race card, soon to be legal problems, thin resume, multiple policy blunders. I’ll be glad when he’s gone.

Hey, William of Bedford, have you ever made an unsuccessful pass at a woman, maybe tried to kiss one during a slow-dance back in high school? If so, you’re ineligible for public office, by the standard Politico now demands – Jonathan Martin says the story couldn’t wait because a woman was made to feel uncomfortable.

Taking no for an answer isn’t nearly good enough. (Mind you, I know no better than you whether Cain ever made a pass at anybody, successful or not.)

Oops, no, that’s only if you’re a REPUBLICAN running for office. Democrats don’t have to take no for an answer, ask Juanita Broadrick.

It was pathetic and ultimately suicidal for GM to go along with ridiculous UAW demands because Ford and Chrysler were less able to afford such demands. It’s similarly stupid for Establishment GOP guys to use the vicious Dem media tactics as if they were rocks to scrape the conservative barnicles off the hull.

It’ll be Romney’s turn soon enough, so you Established boys shouldn’t be in such a hurry for Cain to leave.

If he pushed her head at his crotch while she was asking him for a job, I’ll bail – it would be almost as bad as one of Clinton’s lesser sins.

That’s not what Jonathan Martin was talking about – he said a different woman was “made uncomfortable” by Cain’s invitation to his hotel suite. (This might have been perfectly innocent, Mr. Ten Commandments – an exec gets a comped hotel suite to throw parties, which his wife attends.)

As for this woman with her story, it started to stink with Allred’s crude joke about packages. She’s on what was Larry King – shopping a book deal? Isn’t there something in those Commandments about bearing false witness?

Can we find out first, or are you just too embarrassed by the “seriousness of the charge” to give Cain any benefit of doubt or due process?

It would be nice to have a candidate who had never been accused of wrong doing of any kind. That does not mean that they would not be degraded and attacked viciously like Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Ronald Reagan, Dan Quail, etc. We need to find the best candidate we can, even if they are not perfect. St. Paul was Saul the cruel persecutor of Christians. Martin Luther and St. Francis were sexually hyperactive in their youth. We need to be realists, while doing the best we can to elect fine people. Bill Clinton, the Kennedys, and many other Democrats have been far worse than Herman Cain, and worse yet, while in office, yet they are the beloved icons of the Democrats. I disagree with the authors premise. We need to pick the best candidate even if they have faults. Believe me, if we settle for Romney who is a fine man, we will hear of every weird aspect of Mormonism. We will hear about it over and over again, ad infinitum. That is not a criticism of LDS adherents or Romney, but they will dig up “Christians” who will tear apart the idea of having a Mormon for POTUS.
We need to wake up and fight for the best we have, and quit the infighting between the candidates.

When I heard there were settlements, and that $10,000 usually constituted “go away, you pest, you have no case” money, but that $100,000 usually meant something serious happened and the organization had to pay dearly to settle it, I thought to myself, “Well, it’ll probably turn out to be closer to the $10-K range.”

When I found out it was $35,000, I thought, “Hmm. That’s not $100,000, but it’s still a lot more than $10,000. Hmm.”

When I heard there was a fourth accuser, I thought, “Um. What’s her credibility?”

When I heard that she had a conversation about the incident with two other people after it happened, and that they’d signed sworn affadavits confirming the conversation, I realized the evidence was piling up.

So, here’s the deal: I’ll lay 65% odds that Herman Cain groped one or more of these women in an unclassy (and distinctly maritally unfaithful) way. And if the quote about “you want a job, don’t you?” is accurate, then he was accustomed to using his power and influence to get favors.

He’s not a confirmed rapist like Bill Clinton. He’s not an evil guy. And there’s a possibility — less than 50% in my view, but a possibility — he’s been falsely accused.

Still, I think those who’re acting as if they’re certain it’s all a hoax are not being careful to look at the evidence objectively. It may be a hoax; it’s still possible. But you can’t dismiss it any more as utterly incredible; there is now at least some credibility.

I think you’re getting it wrong. We’re not saying he’s totally innocent, we’re saying, he’s innocent till any sort of proof shows up. Not just a convenient run of “courageous women” with questionable timing coming forward.

We’re also saying, there’s a set precedent for this exact thing, with Clinton AND Gore. and we’re not playing the double standard game. If Bill can do it and get elected, then Herman can too. One standard, or go scratch. The fact that we all saw this coming weeks ago makes it all the less credible. I’m about a thousand times more concerned with my government running guns to drug gangs for political gain. why the hell arent you ?

damm……lots of “shoot the messenger” salvos flying on here tonite…But folks…here’s a simple question…What truly innocent man has ever had half of an infantry squad lined up to accuse him of sexual harrassment…and chances are….(no pun intended) reinforcements (for the women) are on the way?

well scoots. It happened to me. I took it to court because I could not afford to pay her off. I won but in the end it cost me more than a year severance would have. My lawyer wanted to sue but she had no money. I later found out she had been convicted for lying in court prior to working for me. (The background check did not find this out).

I am going to vote for Herman Cain even if he is in last place (this is ticking me off – PJM should try and find out the truth but this is a joke).

We all know that women never lie, especially where money or politics is concerned. And the ideas that someone is innocent until proven guilty and the burden of proof being on the claimant, not the defendent? Obsolete if the charge is made by a woman against a man, especially if it’s a white woman against a black man. No woman has ever lied about that, ever. It just doesn’t happen.

some of the posts on here are absurd. please people Gloria Alredd?? are you kidding? like shes real credible? this lady accuser has her own checkered past of fraud and false accusations against others. shes been out of work for years, shes been through bankruptcy. people please get a clue. have her take a lie detector test. another crazy gold digger with a gold digging lawyer.

Anguish? Uh, no, try “outrage” — yes, that works. It is a feeling of outrage at the MSM/Rino media, which we conservatives should be immune to by now. And yet, we still flinch.

So are we truly going to have another tarring of a black conservative male with the “sex-crazed Negro” brush? I mean really. Talk about the easiest of all possible political subterfuges:

“He ,,, he … he lunged for my genitals and … and … he tried to shove my head into his crotch … and I was so confused because he had just booked me a killer suite in a posh hotel and he KNEW i had a boyfriend and all I was asking for was a nice five or hopefully six figure job … and … Gee! I should have said something sooner, seeing as he was guilty of criminal sexual assault against my person, but, I dunno, I just wanted to forget about it. But then I saw the Politico/PJMedia pieces on those two or three poor women. And something just clicked in me. Their brave un-named, un-specified allegations against Herman Cain made me realize that I too could serve my country and, uh, stuff like that. So I googled “Allred” — I couldn’t remember her first name — and I found her website http://www.gloriaallred.com/ and so I decided to just go for it. And here I am.”

—”In 1998, when Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff got the full details of President Bill Clinton’s adulterous affair with a 21-year-old intern, the magazine killed the story, leaving the nascent new media, in the person of The Drudge Report, to bring it to light.”

Well, yeah, but Clinton was a white liberal rake. What’s your point? Yeah, he sodomized a young intern on the Oval Office rug, the one with the presidential seal on it, but so what? Okay, okay, he then lied about it, naturally, and then went on to perjure himself in federal court. But he was caught dead to rights and there was nothing for it but to wait for the national media to make his mea culpas — hey, it was just sex, and it wasn’t even sex, it was mere head-f***ing. But this is different. For one thing, we don’t yet actually KNOW anything, Andrew. Right now what we have is one, heretofore unknown, woman and her only-too-well-known lawyer spinning a narrative. You need to use a little critical reason here, old chap, rather than laying a bunch of high-minded, lead-by-example. we-play-by-the-rules-even-if-they-don’t CRAP on us.

Gloria, where were You when slick willie claimed he did not have sex with that woman Monika Lewinsky? Where were You when Kathryn willey said she was groped by a sitting president. Where were You when the democratic party claimed it was all about sex. Where you when Paula Jones received over $800.000 settlement from slick willie. Where were You when Jessie Jackson had his love child. I agree with Andrew that We need to vet our own. The hypocrisy is too much.

BUT yes, I’m concerned that these charges will actually protect Cain from other criticisms. He was in the process of going down, and these charges may have, ironically, revived him.

This is the most non-political correct thing I can say. Is it better that I say it, or the opposition in the general election? In every photo I see…

Cain’s eyes are always bloodshot.

I say maybe it’s a photo-reproduction issue. But, combined with a report that he was seen drinking wine with breakfast (Daily Beast, Four Seasons, Atlanta)…

And with this past cancer, I just get a feeling that his physical, and maybe mental health, may not be always solid. Maybe I’m wrong, but we don’t want to nominate a potential train wreck, and see the Repubs lose big.

Oh come on. Health problems are never predictable. Look at Cheney. Major heart surgery and he’s still around after how many years? Carroll Shelby had a heart transplant about 40 years ago and he’s still busy making cars and major financial deals that go with that business. Look at the number of supposedly healthy athletes who just fall over dead with no prior history. You can’t use health as a criteria.

The accusations against Mr. Herman Cain would appear to be racially motivated. I listened to Ms. Bialek reading “her” description of the alleged event. She was reading in a highly dramatic fashion and sounded unfamiliar with the text. I wonder if the perpetrators of this convenient “discovery” are hoping there are still enough racists that are threatened by the thought of any white women engaged in any variety of sexual congress with a black man. Each subsequent “revelation” seems to escalate the hysterical and perverse descriptions of this man’s supposed comportment.
The only real “error” on Mr. Cains part is being black while being Republican. It is for this reason he is being pilloried.
I plan on voting for this man in 2012.

You’re right on. We are the good guys and should stand for a higher standard that the lefties. As much as I like Herman Cain, he needs to stand up, take the bullets being flung by the liberals in the media or go home. Our next President needs to be a strong and determined person if we are going to make it through the next four years.

Klaven, I ordinarily really like your work, but… nyet, my friend.
I understand where you’re coming from, I really do. I’ve heard these same sentiments before. It’s just that I’m reasonably certain that the greater the extent we follow through on them, the smaller our chance of survival.
Let’s use a metaphor to describe what playing the game this way means. Imagine for a moment that this was a high school dodgeball game (I like dodgeball because the liberals I’ve met hate it). We’ll use the current convention and say we’re Red Team, they’re Blue Team. Just before the game, a member of Blue Team makes a completely off the wall charge that one of the Red Team captains punched his little sister in Elementary School.
And the reaction, as we play the game, is that Red Team immediately turns on their own captain, and begins throwing balls at them. Meanwhile, the game starts, and Blue Team hits us all in our exposed backs.
I appreciate the need to vet candidates, but we have GOT to do it on our terms, not theirs. Concrete evidence only, and I mean tangible, hold-in-your-hand proof. We should categorically cut out the he said/she said, the circumstantial, and the unknowable unless and until we get said concrete evidence. Then and *only* then should we act accordingly.
I will not take into account the full set of details regarding Cain… I fully admit I neither know them nor believe myself the best equipped to sum them up. What I have noticed so far is that pretty much all of the evidence I am familiar with… the accusations themselves, the circumstances, payouts from Cain… fall in the categories I mentioned above. That’s rather what lead me to thinking about how the left knows it can reliable destroy right-wingers.
But I digress. This is the point I’m trying to make: Eagerly pouncing to investigate every little lie is not getting us any closer to truth. And just because we’re on the side of right doesn’t mean we have to be on the side of gullible. If the dark lord of darkness, in confrontation, accuses you of being evil, murderous, or cruel, it is not the time for fifty minutes of deep introspective meditation while he hurls fireballs at you. It’s time to draw your sword and get into the fray. Likewise, in the same way we will never find a hero who is somehow so pure that the dark lord of darkness can’t try to kill them, we’re never going to find a candidate so clean that nothing can be twisted about their words, or in extreme cases, made up wholesale.
I’ve heard before, and it’s a meritous point, that we must not become what we behold. And I answer that we’re not, yet… but as we act now, we’re trying to. What we do is a very good example of the perfect being the enemy of the good. We’re seriously considering sacrificing the very thing we’re trying to protect, the safety of the USA, looking for the perfect sword to protect it with. And ultimately, that means we’re as much responsible for allowing the leftists to destroy the country as the leftists themselves are for effecting the destruction.

She needed a job and he offered one. When they were alone, he fondled her, forcibly french-kissed her, groped her, and guided her hand to his genitals.

No, those aren’t the opening lines from a steamy novel or the words of Herman Cain’s latest accuser, Sharon Bialek, the first of four of his alleged sexual harassment victims to come forward. Ms. Bialek claims she was shocked, I say shocked, when Cain put his hand up her skirt, “grabbed [her] head and brought it towards his crotch.”

Since Gloria Allred is in Ms. Bialek’s corner, can there be any doubt in her veracity?

However, the man who did the frenching, groping, and guiding was former Vice President Al Gore. His victim, massage therapist Molly Hagerty, described her encounter to Portland, Oregon police soon after tipsy Gore, acting like a giggling, “crazed sex poodle,” tried to seduce her in his Hotel Lucia room in 2006.

After Politico.com broke the unsubstantiated Herman Cain story, every member of Obama’s MSM in the country descended on the allegations as if it were manna from the gods of liberalism because Cain isn’t a Democrat liberal.

Just as with the initial revelations about Democrat Bill Clinton’s Monica Lewinsky affair and Democrat John Edwards’ productive hanky panky with Rielle Hunter, the Portland Tribune was well aware of Molly Hagerty’s claims concerning Democrat Gore but chose not to publicize them despite the fact an official police report was filed and made public by TheSmokingGun.com.

In that report, when Gore ordered a late night massage at the Lucia, he was alleged to have used an alias, “Mr. Stone,” though he is described in the report as “Al Gore, former vice president of the United States of America” and charged with “alleged Sexual Assault.”

It’s not as if Portland was Gore’s first known instance of forcing tonsil hockey on an unwilling partner. While still VP, drunk at a New Year’s Eve party, Gore . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5924.)

I’m afraid Mr. Cain set a precedent for the fairness question and a reason for questioning his judgment when he began publicly, and for no practical reason attacking the Perry campaign as though it had undoubtedly released the original accusations of sexual harassment.

A quote today from Bill Bennet’s article in PJ Media: “Neither is it insignificant that the Cain campaign discounted the charges in the initial stories, saying they were based on anonymous sources, only to make a mockery by blaming other campaigns with less substantiation than the original stories.”

There is never a good reason to publish unsubstantiated stories as fact. The media has a moral responsibility (rarely if ever exercised)to deal with facts, not allegations.

It is both frightening and enlightening that the media “reports” unsubstantiated allegations first published by other outlets rather than get the facts.

If the allegations against Cain can be proved to be true there should be sufficient facts to substantiate them without resorting to unnamed accusers making unspecified claims. And while it is uncomfortable to question the history of accusers, it is discomforting if they have a history of questionable behavior as does Ms. Bialek.

Had responsible reporters researched the facts before breaking what so far is no more than a hatchet job we might have rational data on which to make judgment. Until we have verifiable facts this is no more than unsubstantiated character assassination of a man who, by all other accounts is an honest, honorable, remarkable, accomplished and inspriational human being capable of restoring good governance in America.

In spite of the old adage, ‘Where there is smoke there is fire’, settlements are not admissions of guilt. Lawyers and court hearingings are costly. Far more than someone’s yearly wages. The bad publicity for the organization, even if you ultimately win, is more costly still. So the organization’s accountants, lawyers, and insurers will settle out of court. (It took a great deal of guts and money for Carol Burnett to take on the tabloids.)

All the facts are not in, so, to use another saw, don’t rush to judgement.

Regarding the actual argument that Andrew Klavan is making — Amen. Possibly it takes one of us who have left the left to make it. The unfairness of life rankles, but life on earth is unfair. We cannot let it get in the way holding ourselves to doing the right thing. One more oldie: Didn’t your mother ever tell you two wrongs do not make a right?

“Two wrongs don’t make a right” … take that literally, and your mom had no right to punish you in any way when you did something wrong.

We would have had no right to bomb the Axis powers because “two wrongs don’t make a right.”

Hogwash.

We must punish the left with every weapon at our disposal and we must not stop until they are gone. Nuke ‘em ’till they glow and then go back and nuke the ashes over and over. They have visited a war of annihilation upon us and they shall have one.

A mother punishing her child his her responsibility, not a wrong. Bombing an evil army to save more lives than you are taking is not a wrong. You are taking the moral low ground. Cain lied when Crazy Ron confronted him about his stand on the Fed. Herman said you cannot believe everything you read on the internet. Paul had quoted almost word for word what Cain had said on the Neil Boortz radio show. I don’t know about you, but I listen to the radio, I don’t read it. Herman’s answer was Clintonesque. Herman is pro gay and pro choice. If that is your kind of man, vote for him. But, don’t feed me your line of crap.

My first thought when the allegation surfaced was of To Kill a Mockingbird. I have contributed to Cain’s candidacy , understanding that he had a slim chance of success when the POOP elite (Pernicious Obsolete Old Party) have all the money. Still, I wanted his message heard, hoping that the rush to socialism could be diverted to a small degree or attenuated.

Andrew Klavan sexually harrassed me in his car 15 years ago. He grabbed my package and pulled my head towards his crotch and said thatg he liked guys in uniform. I told him that he couldn’t ask and that I wasn’t going to tell and I wasn’t “that kind of boi” and he backed off.

Andrew, all I want is for you to come clean about this. I have nothing to gain.

I fully disagree with Mr. Klavan here: his argument is tantamount to the Colonial British saying, “We musn’t get out of rigid formation or remove our red uniforms to fight these Americans! Then we’re no better than they are!”

This is war: The Marxists must be removed from American culture as far as feasible. NO DEFEAT WITH DIGNITY…no more excuses….too little time left.

Rubbish, Anne. You make hyperbole of COMMON SENSE. Go to Dr. Helen’s website (http://drhelen.blogspot.com/) and see a nice rebuttal. Klavan is setting up the GOP for ALINSKY’S Rule #4 attack. NO WAY!!!

So because ole Saul laid out a way to set us up by our better nature we should descend to our baser nature? By his rules whatever way he wins. Why? Because if we use this as an excuse to ‘play dirty’ we become dirty. If we become dirty, then they will use that against us. Alinsky-ites do not care by what means other were defeated, just that they are and that ultimately the Alinsky people win.

So because ole Saul laid out a way to try and set us up by our better nature we should descend to our baser nature? By his rules whatever way he wins. Why? Because if we use this as an excuse to ‘play dirty’ we become dirty. If we become dirty, then they will use that against us. Alinsky-ites do not care by what means others were defeated, just that they are and that ultimately the Alinsky people win.

This is not the first time you have used this argument. Lining up in red coats for military action is not related to moral rule, it was what was proved to be a bad outdated military tactic. (And at some point the British had broken the previous ‘preferred’ tactics when they took that one up.) You are confusing ‘how things have been done’ with the underlying principles of morality.

It might be noted that one reason The Declaration was written to lay out the correctness of the cause for all men to see.

Thank you very much Mr. Klavan. We must take the moral high ground. When I pull the lever in the voting booth my thought is not what is best for me or for my family. My thought is what is the moral high ground. I am afraid we have already lost that during this past week. God help us.

I changed my opinion of a lot of pundits about a month ago when El Fatbo and the Not So Great One attacked Michele Bachman over a comment she maid about vaccines. I have numerous sources that tell me that some vaccines contain mercury which causes autism. Also, there are zero studies showing what happens when up to 9 vaccines are administered at once. El Fatbo said that Michele had almost jumped the shark. Well El Fatbo jumped the shark and the Not So Great One said something only slightly less offensive. I called the Not So Great One to respond and suggest he talk to his friend Suzanne Sommers on this matter. His call screener thought I had a valid point and I was on hold for more that an hour at which time the Not So Great One had his screener drop my call. I called back and got through 3 more times and was dropped each time.

Folks, the left wing “drive-by” media is unfair and they are liars. They twist the truth to fit and obtain their agenda(s). That is why we look for people who tell it like it is. Mr. Klavan has an absolute valid point about the unfairness and slant that is shown against who we consider the “good guys”. It’s all part of the fight of good vs evil and will always be.

I like Mr. Cain and the policies he has presented so far. Maybe this is just a way to have Mr. Cain removed from the Republican race. He [Mr. Cain] now has to focus all of his resources into dealing with the information (be factual or made up) that has been released. So let’s say that this is just another smear or made up lie, wouldn’t you want to see Mr. Cain at his best to deal with the drama? I do, not because I want to see him or his family suffer but because our country is in a horrible pickle and we need REAL leaders to get us out of trouble and put the US Government back on the right track.

Mr. Cain has a long road ahead of him dealing with these accusations, if it comes to light that this is just another play by the left and he deals with it honorably and with morals that match mine, he’ll still have my vote.

And I apologize for going off topic, but there is a political problem now: what happens if now this story “disappears” and in October 2012 the other (three ?) women come out crying and telling other horrifying stories on TV ? We lose. And we lose badly.

We need to win.
We cannot lose the next elections, it would be the end of America.

The man should have never run.
Our pundits are stupid, that’s why the left has accomplished so much (subversion).

Really? We will loose badly why? Will all the people without jobs say, well the economy stinks and we are going over a cliff but damn, Cain hasn’t acted like the saint I want in the white house? Again I would vote for the man who has been proven to be far worse than Cain even if every allegation against Cain is true, Bill Clinton, over the train wreck that is Obama.

No, they’ll vote for Obama because they believe the Republicans haven’t let him help them out. The Ds have that narrative and the weak-minded middle wants to believe it and they sure don’t want all of our messy fiscal restraint and pushing granny over cliffs. We simply have an electorate too stupid to act responsibly.

Politico is a member of journOlist and this is their continuing work. I refuse to let people like that destroy a person in my eyes. It just doesn’t work any more…you may be able to discount that journOlist stuff but I cannot. Taking ‘the high road’ means you haven’t the courage to stand up for what is right so don’t preach to me about my morals and what’s going on is ‘OK’, because you know it isn’t.

Yeah, sorry pal, those days are over. I’m sick of bringing a knife to a gun fight and getting slaughtered. This time, we’re going the full monte, because its too important. We’ll play the race card, we’ll use the same excuses word for word that slick willie’s defenders did. We’ll go nuts over stuff we dont care about to expose hypocrisy. You think we really gave a crap about wiener’s junk pics ? We didn’t and we still don’t. Not even a little bit. But its taste your own medicine time for the left. One standard, evenly applied, or go scratch. You establishment guys will happily, honorably, predictably nominate Romney and lose. Good luck with that.

You want to play to some Bushido code while the ninjas slit your throats ? knock yourself out, that’s playing their game, their way. I’m done with it. I’m out to win this time.

It really doesn’t matter how much, Mr. Klaven, you lecture on the “goodness” of how one may think or of the inequities that may exist. The honest voters of this country will determine who they deem to choose to represent them WITHOUT the “help” of any member of the press. The day is long past when ANY level of press “recommendations” will be considered as the main influence of voter choice/choices. Americans are NOT dumb or without the ability to think for themselves, no matter how much we are lectured by the likes of you and/or your collegues on either side of the political spectrum.
I would suggest that you and all your fellow-press collegues keep that in mind.

If we fight fair and use Marquis of Queensbury rules then ultimately, every one of our candidates steps aside when the media sets its sights on them, and soon we don’t have any candidates left. What bothers me most about this – I’m ambivalent on Cain – is the power that the Democrats and their media propaganda machine wield. We line up our candidates and they just knock them off, one by one, like they were in a shooting gallery. And that makes me see red. Because as far as I’m concerned, after Clinton’s Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones, Juanita Broderick et al, John Edwards’ love child, Barney Frank’s live-in male prostitute and on and on…. HOW F***ING DARE THE MEDIA OR THE DEMOCRATS SAY F***ING BOO ABOUT ANYONE’S DALLIANCES. But they do. And they get away with it. And half the fools in this country go right along with it and tut, tut and preen about how they couldn’t vote for someone so besmirched. As far as I’m concerned half this country is f***ed in the head. And that’s why we’re collapsing.

Maybe we are “the good guys”. In fact, I think it is quite obvious that the entire world is being polarized along the good/evil battlefront, and I have no question but that the Left is firmly on the side of evil.

That said, we must realize that a prime tenet of the Alinsky methodology is to hold the enemy to his own standards. Following Mr. Klavan’s theory to fruition, conservatives and the GOP play directly into the Alinsky playbook.

In my former life I was a pretty serious student of Alinsky because most of my union adversaries were Alinsky diciples, some of them even knew it. You have to know the rules, but you don’t have to follow them, and you don’t have to do what they want and expect you to do. In fact, as I said in the post I did in response to Roger Simon’s Night at the Library, Rule One for dealing with Alinsky’s rules is NEVER GIVE THEM WHAT THEY WANT.

Now, I don’t happen to think the bimbo eruption on Cain came from the Left; doesn’t make any sense for them to attack such a weak candidate this early in the game. But, the Leftist media being what it is, couldn’t resist piling on. When Lefties catch a religious person “sinning,” they slobber like Pavlov’s dog; they can’t help it.

If Cain had been forthright from the outset, I think we on the right have learned enough not to let lefty media attacks and Democrat prosecutors kill our officeholders and candidates. But Cain has handled this horribly and I still don’t think he’s told the truth. I can only surmise that he’s even more afraid of Mrs. Cain than he is of the electorate. In any event, the right thing to do if you’re really innocent, is to attack the attackers in righteous, truthful anger. If you’re guilty, you have to come clean, fully and forthrightly, and let it fall where it may; most people are willing to forgive the honest, repentant sinner though some things are unforgiveable, and lying is one of them.

God never said that life would be fair. He only said is will be better after we die.

So Mr. Cain, just as Lieutenant John Chard of the British Royal Engineers in 1879 defended Rourke’s Rift with 150 British soldiers against approximately 4,000 Zulu warriors, be resourceful and dig deep for the courarge to fight against all odds; for the MSM will surely try to overwhelm you with accusations just as the Zulus tried to overwhelm the British outpost.

I don’t believe a person has a right to make unsubstantiated allegations. The Police wouldn’t give these incidents two seconds of their time with the evidence presented so far. But this is politics and there are no rules.

However, if it turns out that there is verifiable evidence that you did more than tell the equivelant of a few off color jokes; then I will be among the first to call for you to step aside.

“There’s a reason we right wingers vet our candidates while the left adulates theirs, a reason we condemn our miscreants while the left elevates theirs, a reason our news outlets cover stories that the left covers up.”

Cut the crap. This is politics and you’re oversimplifying to the detriment of the right wing.

Humans make mistakes.

What we have in office, now, is inhuman.

My candidate is a human being who will ride this story out because there is definitely a huge coordinated effort behind this smear…

…that tells me that Herman Cain is WAY more innocent than many deplorable, conspiring, INHUMANS would have you believe.

This whole media conspiracy crap would be funny if it wasn’t so sad. Sorry but reading these comments makes me think may the left is correct and the right has been overrun by paranoid nut jobs. If the media wanted to set up Cain they would have waited until he was the nominee, think people it really isn’t that hard.

The simple fact is though no one needed to set up Cain or work to undermine him because he was never going anywhere. One of my biggest problems with Romney is he flip flops but at least he waits a week or two. Cain can be on both sides of an issue in matter of hours. This election will be about the economy but there is still a minimum bar that has to be met and Cain’s has demonstrated a level of ignorance on foreign policy that is fairly shocking to see in a political candidate. For god’s sake the man is running in a republican primary but he can’t intelligently state his position on abortion? The man is side show and the best thing he could do for the republican party is drop out and go back to selling books.

So, why is David Vitter (call girls while married) still in the Senate while Anthony Wiener (sending pictures of his dork over the Internet while married) is out of a job? Why did the entire Republican establishment stay quiet for over a year about John Ensign’s tawdry little affair/cover-up attempt? Why did the Clinton witch-hunt happen? Please give example of a Republican who’s fled in disgrace from a baseless Lefty smear. Or, not. Mr. Cain could be pure as Mother Theresa; I still wouldn’t vote for a guy who didn’t know that China is a nuclear power…

…we’re the good guys. We have to do what’s right. The left doesn’t. Sorry, but that’s the way it works. It’s the price you pay for defending what’s true and good, the price of holding yourself to a high moral standard.

This is a comedy bit, right? Either that, or a classroom demonstration of several of the right’s more pathological symptoms: denial, projection…

Oh, never mind. As comedy it’s not funny and as a seriously-meant description of a right that, every day, kowtows to lies and promotes propaganda about its enemies while declining to punish any of its own hypocrites and violators of its (endlessly spouted) moral “values,” it’s funny but, alas, it’s not funny. Carry on, you oblivious nudniks.

The democrat Party and yes, some of the GOP establishment, must destroy a black conservative candidate from achieving the highest office of the land. It’s the truth, period. The media and Washington insiders have chosen Obama verses Romney as their promoted contest. Anything which threatens this will be handled with lies, false mischaracterization, and yes more salacious sexual descriptions involving Mr. Cain. I expected this behavior from the democrat party. I’m shock that the GOP establishment would lower their integrity in the gutter. Clarence Thomas Part II. Bring on a third party bid. F%^K both parties.

The democrat Party and yes, some of the GOP establishment, must destroy a black conservative candidate from achieving the highest office of the land. It’s the truth, period. The media and Washington insiders have chosen Obama verses Romney as their promoted contest. Anything which threatens this will be handled with lies, false mischaracterization, and yes more salacious sexual descriptions involving Mr. Cain. I expected this behavior from the democrat party. I’m shock that the GOP establishment would lower their integrity in the gutter. Clarence Thomas Part II. Bring on a third party bid.

I truly like Herman Cain. It is unfortunate that these women can come out of the woodwork and level these accusations against him. No matter what party you are part of no one deserves to be falsly accused. I don’t know if he did it or not but it seems very strange.

I really do not see how or why anyone is upset at anyone for defending Cain.

First of all there have been no proof of a single one of the allegations.. To this point in time not a single one of the allegations have been proven to be of merit.

After the last 3 years of the Palin syndrome from the left how can any logical human being think that IF there is a person the leftist do not like they will not hesitate to slime and lie, which it is a fact they have done this very thing for 3 YEARS against Palin , what they have suddenly found their morals and would not do the same to Cain? are you serious?

I will be the first to denounce Cain IF he is lying. If he is lying he has no place running for Potus, well at least not as a Conservative..

But I will not be dissuaded by a pack of proven lying leftist media pukes . They have NO credibility at this point.

Prove me wrong…

How many stories on Sarah Palin’s so called “Ethic” violations did they run with, how many Hit pieces like it was Palin’s fault that the AZ congresswoman was shot, right that one was a real gem of journalistic deduction… And tell me how much of that cr@p proved out to be true.

Here’s Andrew Klavan’s (and others on the Right) defense of “we gotta be tough on Cain, ’cause we’re ‘better’ than they are!” cr*p…there’s enough of the Leftist enablers on the Right (not gonna even TOUCH the establishment twerps on this topic, like Rove, Krauthammer, et al).

All *I* gotta say on this is: to quote from Harold Shukman, the Editor of “Lenin, A New Biography,” written by Dmitri Volkogonov,

“He was made into an icon, a totem of ideological purity and guidance beyond questioning.”

Geez: WE CONSERVATIVES are most decidedly NOT “pure”…but WE KNOW IT; why won’t/can’t these otherwise-supporters please stop trying to confuse high-minded “good intentions” with REALITY?!?

The ONLY solution: WE WIN. THEY LOSE. Or, do they REALLY want to side with “them”?!

“Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem.”

“No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.”

Barry Goldwater:

“I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is ‘needed’ before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible.”

Ron Paul:

“(Government) should be as small as possible. There is nothing wrong with describing conservatism as protecting the Constitution, protecting all things that limit government. Government is the enemy of liberty. Government should be very restrained.”

Herman Cain:

(With Ron Paul) everything is ‘end this, end that, end this, end that!’ You have to fix stuff, not end everything.”

Herman Cain has been ACCUSED by three women of acting improperly. One remains entirely anonymous. One has allowed her name to appear, but has not made any of the specifics of her accusations public. She works for the Treasury Department as a mouthpiece. She had made an accusation of sexual harassment when she worked for Immigration, but dropped it. The third, Sharon Bialek, has made specific her accusations, which in at least some jurisdictions qualify as sexual assault. She happens to reside in the same building as David Axelrod, had been fired from the National Restaurant Association’s non-profit foundation for making fraudulent accusations of sexual harassment, and is reported to be in financial difficulty…or she was until recently.

Y’know, I think I’ll believe the accusers when a blue dress or some tapes show up. Until then, I will believe Herman.

The attack on Herman Cain is very clever insofar as “sexual harrassment” is the charge, but the fallback position is every bit as damaging; adultery. This leaves him in no-man’s-land in trying to answer the charges. Assume that he never sexually harassed anyone, but did engage in extra-curricular activities. Would he be better off by admitting that the activity was consensual? I don’t think so. This is a game of “heads we win, tails you lose.”

Must we eliminate all candidates who ever strayed during their marriage unless they fess up? This is the connundrum of politics. Practically anything less than sainthood on the sexual front can result in the kiss of death for an otherwise worthy candidate. This is so odd, considering that we live in the most blatantly over-sexed culture in the history of the United States. I’d rather have a philanderer in the White House who knows how to solve the economic and foreign policy problems that are plagueing this country than some moral saint who doesn’t know what the hell they’re doing.